For the free viewing. http://blog.chron.com/ultimaterocke...er-free-view-to-cable-and-satellite-carriers/
They haven't picked it up yet, nor have the other providers. Just because it is free temporarily doesn't mean they will carry it. You should check out the csn thread in the Astros forum.
They won't. If they do, they risk upsetting their customers when the 45 days runs out. There's no benefit for them.
Two things: 1.) Demand is much higher now than for the Astros in May. 2.) A few smaller providers actually did bite... but the heavyweights didn't. Not that it'll necessarily be different this time, but it's not exactly the same.
The reasoning is going to be the same. If they carry the preview, the fans will be upset when it's taken away and that will create more demand. The demand weakens the providers position and getting a taste of the channel might even cause some customers to switch to Comcast once they can't get the channel any more. Maybe there is more demand now with the Rockets, but demand will be even higher if they give subscribers the channel and then take it away again. The providers don't want that so they'll ignore the offer just like they did last time. They have nothing to gain by carrying the preview.
Anyone know if since CSN is offering the free preview will the Mavs game still be blacked out in Houston? Thanks
It's possible that's the reasoning, but I think it's absolutely silly (as I did back then). For the base that would care about CSN Houston, I don't think any subscriber is unaware that the Rockets are playing basketball. I don't see there being a revelation of "OH MY GOD, LOOK AT WHAT I'M MISSING, CURSE YOU PROVIDER!" Fans already know they're missing games, and if they're inclined to blame the provider and/or switch to Comcast, they would already be doing so. It's been over a year. It would basically be a good-faith gesture on behalf of providers to their sports fans. There's plenty of people, including in my own family, that would be overjoyed with their non-Comcast provider if they did this... so there IS something to gain. On the other hand, any subscriber who would be more upset at the provider than they were before a free preview is pretty much a complete idiot. Undoubtedly, there are a few of those, but I hate catering to them.
I get the whole, "they'll be upset when they take it away" argument.... but Uverse gives me free previews of channels quite frequently. It is what it is...a free preview. I don't recall ever even thinking about being upset when it stopped.
Right, but they're giving you a free preview of a channel that they actually carry and offer to you as a subscriber. When they "take away" your free preview of HBO and you still want it, you're free to call them up, pay the extra money and add the channel to your lineup. This is not possible with CSN Houston. Once they take it away from you, there's NOTHING they can do for you if you want it back. Your only recourse is to either leave UVerse for Comcast or more vociferously join "WE WANT CSN!" chorus. Neither option is good for UVerse.
I understand the thinking, but studies prove this not to be true. People are not inherently rational (Predictably Irrational is a great book this topic) and it's been shown many times in different scenarios and situations that customers are more satisfied when they've never been offered a product than if they have been offered it and had it taken away, even though they are exactly where they started at that point. The general reason is that people have a baseline of what they expect - and if you give them a product, they change that expectation baseline to incorporate it, even if they rationally know it's only temporary. There are all sorts of quirky things like this in behavioral psychology. That book is a really good read.
The difference in this case, I'd argue, is that this isn't a new product that people are somewhat unfamiliar with. They already know what watching a Rockets game is like. Most have done it for many years. They're also already aware that they're missing the games. But even if we assume that psychology still holds true... there's no way it would turn out bad for the providers unless, in addition to being angry, most subscribers change their view and decide to blame the providers. This is where it really gets silly. Just look at this forum, where most people blame the CSN/Astros/Rockets end more than the providers and many diehard fans are actually hoping their providers don't take up CSN on the free trial offer. If those people would be more angry after the 45-day period ends, their anger would be in the direction of CSN, not the providers. It just seems like an incredible stretch to think that Houston sports fans would A) be more angry than they are now after the 45 days, even though they already know they're missing the games and B) that their anger would then go toward the providers and not CSN. I mean, I'm sure there are one or two complete idiots that might do that, but I wish the providers wouldn't cater to that crowd. I could be wrong, but I think their audience is more savvy than they give it credit for.
Again, if you want ATT to take notice then fill this out: http://uversechannels.att.com/channel-survey http://uversechannels.att.com/channel-survey
But you're assuming the general public is paying attention to the details of the battle like people here are - that's just not the case. You're absolutely right that most people right now blame CSN/Astros/etc. But if DTV suddenly has the channel for a while, that equation changes. When they take it away, people will blame DTV for that, right or wrong, reasonable or unreasonable. That's the situation DTV wants to avoid. You see it all the time when FOX or CBS or whomever gets into a fight with a provider and a channel goes black for a bit. People tend to blame both parties equally, regardless of the merits of each side - they are just annoyed that programming they had is no longer available because two big businesses can't agree on something. Right now, people primarily blame CSN and the teams - that's a great situation for DTV and not worth risking for 45 days of coverage, especially when they've now got even more leverage because of the CSN bankruptcy mess.
I get that distinction. I thought of it while I was writing my post..and it's a very good point. I suppose people might get mad at them for showing the free preview and pulling it down after it expires. Particularly the overwhelming majority of people who haven't been following this while issue super closely like we have on this board.
